TheologyOnline, religion, politics, forum
Go Back   Theology Online | Christian Forums & More > Politics, Religion, And The Rest > Religion
Reload this Page Evolution - The Great Flood - Fish
Religion Discuss General Theology, Religions and Denominations, God's Attributes, Predestination and Free Will, Dispensationalism, Eschatology, Philosophy, Origins, Archaeology, Science, World History and other such topics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  (#31) Old
Stuu Stuu is offline
BANNED

 


Reputation:
Stuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 02:10 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChoG View Post
If the Great Flood happened at all, it was most certainly restricted to the Known World of the time.
The purpose of such a flood was, I believe, to ensure that all of the human species remaining upon the earth were able to trace their ancestry directly to Adam and therefore to God's Children.
Some Native cultures have differences in their physical make-up which points to a sub-species remaining post flood which, in the unlikely event that it occurred at all, could not possibly have been global.
You're right that there never was a global flood. But your argument here appears to fly in the face of the mythological story that proposes the flood. It insists that all humans were killed, and gives different reasons to yours. Your point about sub-species is biologically wrong, too, we are all the same sub-species.

If the reasons are wrong, why even consider the flood myth anyway?

Stuart



   
Reply With Quote
  (#32) Old
Stuu Stuu is offline
BANNED

 


Reputation:
Stuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 02:13 AM

Stuu: Please tell us what the Theory of Creation is. It better be a theory, and not a just-so story. Theories are falsifiable, supported by evidence, contradicted by no known evidence, and make predictions. I think you will at least fail on that last point, if not the whole definition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sum1sGruj View Post
You know, when you atheists go on with all that, you really just show a lack of reason. You can't even prove God otherwise, and when that is brought up, God forbid, "it's on me to prove it, not you!".
It's funny that atheists assume some superiority while simultaneously defeating themselves. You cannot propose one little tangible thing of how the universe was born, and yet you still deny our ancestors who passed on the message of God for centuries. There is written testimony, prophesy, and history. What do atheists have? Man's guess based on presuppositions, which even then is mightily short of explaining why we exist. That's the irony of it, I think. The atheist argument just sucks, to be honest, and it's only kept afloat by atheists pretty much just patting each other on the back and pepping each other up. In fact, on this forum (and any other religious forum really), most atheists get mighty old and redundant. It's only frustrating to that extent, but you few think that the frustration is due to us being stumped. There's more irony right there. So, if you want to have a discussion about Creation with me, then you need to remove that log from your eye and snap out of that little anti-theist daze. This thread isn't even about Creation., see? It's that log in your eye
So I was right then. You claimed there is a theory of creation, but you can't say what it is.

Stuart



   
Reply With Quote
  (#33) Old
ChoG ChoG is offline
Journeyman

 


Reputation:
ChoG will become famous soon enoughChoG will become famous soon enough
November 23rd, 2011, 02:20 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuu View Post
...Your point about sub-species is biologically wrong, too, we are all the same sub-species.

If the reasons are wrong, why even consider the flood myth anyway?

Stuart
That statement is incorrect. It is rarely discussed, with good reason but does exist. I will not elaborate further for the same reasons, but, I'm old enough to have had the facts, minus final conclusions, taught to me in Primary School Social Studies.



   
Reply With Quote
  (#34) Old
Sum1sGruj Sum1sGruj is offline
BANNED

 


Reputation:
Sum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselves
November 23rd, 2011, 02:22 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuu View Post
Please tell me how the native bird, the Kiwi, made it from Ararat to New Zealand after the flood.

Stuart
When Noah and the animals finally landed, the Earth was recuperating. Until vegetation sprawled again, they remained local. As the vegetation started to etch the land, the animals went in the directions that best suited there needs. In other words, it was a massive migration in all directions according to where the best resources and environments were forming. The kiwi bird is an easy target for predators, so it was likely one of the first to dispatch from Ararat, later to be taken to New Zealand by human migration.



   
Reply With Quote
  (#35) Old
Sealeaf Sealeaf is offline
Over 2000 post club

 


Reputation:
Sealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peersSealeaf is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 02:40 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
Typical. Man asks for evidence, atheist appeals to anything but.
Could be, I would not know because I'm not an atheist.
I believe in God, but I don't believe in the devinity of the Bible.

There are tons of evidence, including the Bible but the evidence does not support a single world wide flood or a young earth.





"Not everything that is clever, is true."

- - St Ephiram of Syria - -
   
Reply With Quote
  (#36) Old
Sum1sGruj Sum1sGruj is offline
BANNED

 


Reputation:
Sum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselvesSum1sGruj is making a name for themselves
November 23rd, 2011, 02:44 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuu View Post
So I was right then. You claimed there is a theory of creation, but you can't say what it is.

Stuart
I'm not going to change the subject and talk about Creation. Furthermore, this is a shining example of what you atheists do., overload the discussion and then hand wave everything away.

I'm looking at the posts by all of you atheists and it just bleeds with the typical nature of you all. It used to be frustrating to me, but now it's just sad. It's like being a militant atheist is an excuse for being ignorant. A long time ago, atheism was simply brought on by a person just not caring or having interest in religion. But now, atheists think they have some extraordinary reason to not believe in God and it's stupid. The fact of the matter is that proof has little to with it, you all are just the unfortunate byproducts of modernization.

Oh, and way to straw man my post. How typical of you, as always



   
Reply With Quote
  (#37) Old
Stuu Stuu is offline
BANNED

 


Reputation:
Stuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 02:48 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChoG View Post
That statement is incorrect. It is rarely discussed, with good reason but does exist. I will not elaborate further for the same reasons, but, I'm old enough to have had the facts, minus final conclusions, taught to me in Primary School Social Studies.
Huh?

Stuart



   
Reply With Quote
  (#38) Old
Stuu Stuu is offline
BANNED

 


Reputation:
Stuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 02:57 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sum1sGruj View Post
When Noah and the animals finally landed, the Earth was recuperating. Until vegetation sprawled again, they remained local. As the vegetation started to etch the land, the animals went in the directions that best suited there needs. In other words, it was a massive migration in all directions according to where the best resources and environments were forming. The kiwi bird is an easy target for predators, so it was likely one of the first to dispatch from Ararat, later to be taken to New Zealand by human migration.
Bzzzt, wrong!

Although voltaire has not got back to us on when he thinks this alleged flood occurred, Kiwi have been in New Zealand for 39 million years with no indication of any interruption, but humans have only been in New Zealand for about 800 years. So no humans took anything to New Zealand at the usually quoted time of the alleged flood.

At least you didn't claim kiwi flew to New Zealand, to your credit!

Would you like another go at making up a fatuous answer to an irrelevant question?

Or how about this question: Australian aboriginal people have lived on that continent for perhaps 45,000 years, some say more. There is no interruption in that continuous presence evident. But the flood conspiracists would have to claim that Australian aboriginal people were drowned in the flood, then somehow repopulated ONLY Australia, reestablishing exactly the same patterns of settlement AND characteristic morphological features AND unique, longstanding cultural traditions, derived from the gene pool and cultural experience of a family of Middle Eastern Jews.

How did that happen?

Stuart



   
Reply With Quote
  (#39) Old
Stuu Stuu is offline
BANNED

 


Reputation:
Stuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peersStuu is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 02:59 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sum1sGruj View Post
I'm not going to change the subject and talk about Creation. Furthermore, this is a shining example of what you atheists do., overload the discussion and then hand wave everything away.
So you are going to make a claim in this thread that there is a theory of creation, but you don't expect to be held to it. How very noble of you.

It was not me that brought the subject up, remember!

Stuart



   
Reply With Quote
  (#40) Old
ChoG ChoG is offline
Journeyman

 


Reputation:
ChoG will become famous soon enoughChoG will become famous soon enough
November 23rd, 2011, 03:10 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuu View Post
Huh?

Stuart
It's fact.

To be more specific would open the possibility of racist repercussions.
The background has not been taught or talked about openly for many years. Religious discussion is a rare exception, as it is highly relevant to the actions and policies of some missionaries as well as discussion involving global flood.



   
Reply With Quote
  (#41) Old
Ted L Glines Ted L Glines is offline
Over 1000 post club
 Ted L Glines's Avatar

 


Reputation:
Ted L Glines is well respectedTed L Glines is well respectedTed L Glines is well respectedTed L Glines is well respectedTed L Glines is well respectedTed L Glines is well respectedTed L Glines is well respectedTed L Glines is well respectedTed L Glines is well respectedTed L Glines is well respected
November 23rd, 2011, 03:16 AM

Obviously there was a Great Flood. How else do you explain the Yetis with scuba gear? It was the "40 days and 40 nights" which was the fiction. Great Flood; no problem -- the world was flat in those days and the water would have run right off the edges in just a few minutes. Oops, there went all the fish, and the Ark, too. No wonder we can't find it, but those Yetis are still looking.



   
Reply With Quote
  (#42) Old
alwight alwight is offline
TOL Subscriber
 alwight's Avatar

 


Reputation:
alwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 03:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavisBJ View Post
Alwight, you gotta remember that Sum1sGruj canít tell a joke from reality.


I seem to be off Sum1sGruj's ignore list again.



   
Reply With Quote
  (#43) Old
Tyrathca Tyrathca is offline
Over 2500 post club
 Tyrathca's Avatar

 


Reputation:
Tyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peersTyrathca is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 03:28 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
Note that the only way creationists can explain the worldwide flood and today's distribution of fish, is to assume evolution.

Not surprising.
And extremely hilarious watching themselves get tied in knots trying to simultaneously rail against standard evolution while trying to sneak hyperevolution past everyone.



   
Reply With Quote
  (#44) Old
alwight alwight is offline
TOL Subscriber
 alwight's Avatar

 


Reputation:
alwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peersalwight is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 03:35 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sum1sGruj View Post
What is this nonsense you are saying?

I would love to think that the post was lighthearted, but I know that it isn't. It's just a self-evident truth gathered by the way a few of you atheists go about anything that doesn't fit your anti-philosophy, science nailed biases.
Relax Gruj we non-creationists quite like to poke gentle fun at silly beliefs sometimes.
Creationists.



   
Reply With Quote
  (#45) Old
Frank Ernest Frank Ernest is offline
TOL Subscriber
 Frank Ernest's Avatar

 



Reputation:
Frank Ernest is well respected by his peers
Frank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peersFrank Ernest is well respected by his peers
November 23rd, 2011, 03:49 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Traditio View Post
Before I actually get into the thread, I feel as though something of a preface is in order: I am not a skeptic of the Great Flood. The Bible asserts that it occurred; therefore, I believe that it occurred.

There is one matter that troubles me, though, and I was hoping that you guys might have a quick and ready answer.

Prima facie, it seems as though if there were a great flood, then all of the freshwater fish would have died. After all, most of the water on the earth is saltwater. Freshwater fish presumably can't live in saltwater. If there were a flood, all of the waters would have been mixed together. Therefore, all of the freshwater fish would have died.

But freshwater fish presently exist.

Anybody want to take a shot at explaining this?
Salmon are spawned in fresh water. They live in saltwater for about 4 years and then return to fresh water to spawn. They do not seem to have a problem with it.






Psalm 144
   
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
flood, noguru is gay, stripe is a moron, stripe is gay


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Copyright ©1997-2012 TheologyOnLine



Logos Bible Study Software Up to 15% OFF FOR THEOLOGYONLINE MEMBERS! Study twice, post once.
Logos Bible Software ótake your Bible study to the next level.